Allahabad High Court
LUCKY KUMAR BHARTIYAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- GAUTAM CHOWDHARY
Holding
The court refused to quash the charge sheet, holding that under Section 528 the court need not assess the correctness of the allegations.
Summary
The applicant, Lucky Kumar Bhartiya, filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to set aside the cognizance order dated 12‑07‑2023 and to quash the charge sheet dated 08‑04‑2022 in a case under Section 60(2) of the Excise Act. The court examined the FIR and the investigation material and concluded that the allegations disclose a cognizable offence and are supported by the evidence collected. The court held that, in exercising its power under Section 528, it is not required to assess the correctness of the allegations or the reliability of the investigation material. Consequently, the prayer to quash the charge sheet and the proceeding was refused. The application was disposed of, with a direction that the applicant may apply for bail within 15 days and that no coercive action be taken during that period, in line with the Supreme Court guidelines in Satendra Kumar Antil v. CBI.
Issues considered
- Whether an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code can be entertained to quash a charge sheet without assessing the merits of the allegations.
- Whether the cognizance order and the charge sheet in the Excise Act case can be set aside.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
- Excise Act — s. 60(2)
Subjects
- bail
- quash of charge sheet
- Section 528
- Excise Act
- cognizance order
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 38552 of 2026
Lucky Kumar Bhartiya
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dileep Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 75
HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for
the State and perused the material brought on record.
2. This application has been filed for setting aside of the
cognizance order dated 12.07.2023 as well as for quashing
of charge sheet dated 08.04.2022 including the entire
proceeding of Case No. 1915 of 2023 (State Vs. Lucky Kumar
Bhartiya), arising out of Case Crime No. 0029 of 2022, under
Section 60(2) of Excise Act, Police Station Puramufti, District
Prayagraj, pending in the court of learned Special Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Allahabad.
3. On perusal of the record, the Court finds that the allegations
made in the first information report disclose commission of a
cognizable offence and those allegations have found support
from the material collected during the course of investigation
on the basis whereof the police has laid a charge sheet against
the applicant.
4. This Court in exercise of its power under section 528 BNSS
is not required to assess the correctness of the allegation and
the reliability of the material collected during the course of
investigation, the prayer to quash the charge sheet and the
consequential proceeding is refused.
5. The present application stands disposed of with the direction
that in case applicant appears before the court concerned and
applies for bail within 15 days from today, the same shall be
decided by the court concerned in accordance with law in view
of the guidelines of Apex Court in the case of Satendra
Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and
NA528 No. 38552 of 2026
2
another (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021,
decided on 07.10.2021).
6. For a period of aforesaid period of 15 days no coercive
action shall be taken against the applicant.
(Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.)
September 14, 2026
Mustaqeem.
Digitally signed by :-
MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…